1. Field of Invention
This invention relates to guns, specifically to an improved cleaning and safety device for firearms.
2. Description of Prior Art
Previously guns were cleaned with implements that had to be left at home or carried separately from the firearm. Gun stores and gun catalogues offer cleaning kits for removing the residue left behind from burned gunpowder. One kit consists of a ramrod with a loop at the end. Another device consists of a ramrod surrounded with wool or xe2x80x9cwooly rodxe2x80x9d. After repeated uses the xe2x80x9cwooly rodxe2x80x9d is too filthy to hold additional soot and is ineffective. An effective cleaning of the cleaning kit is not practical and the wooly rod becomes useless.
A striker cartridge or xe2x80x9csnap capxe2x80x9d (which does not clean a shotgun) is a device that allows the hammer inside the shotgun to release without damaging the hammer or firing pin. Gun cleaning ramrods, oil, cleaning solvent and striker cartridges are sold separately.
My firearm cleaning device incorporates the best aspects of a ramrod with a loop at the end, oil and/or solvent containers, striker cartridges and is shaped to be carried in the barrel of a gun. Originally the ramrod (with a loop at the end) for placing a patch usually made out of absorbent cloth was the preferred way to clean the barrels of shotguns. However the patch placed in the barrel is too small to remove the considerable amount of gunpowder residue that tends to accumulate and a new patch would have to be applied several times to complete the job.
In my firearm cleaning device the loop tip of a ramrod and a larger disposable cleaning element, such as a paper towel, can be used to remove more soot faster and with less effort. The striker cartridge along with a reservoir for holding oil and/or cleaning solvent serves as a handle for the ramrod and all can be stored inside the barrel of a gun.
In the instance of a double barreled shotgun both units of this firearm cleaning device can be carried in the firearm. This allows the owner of a gun to have a storage compartment for both oil and cleaning solvent, which creates a convenient way to clean a firearm after using it.
My firearm cleaning device differs from Patterson, U.S. Pat. No. 470,254 (1892), in that my device does not have a rod with a shouldered knob or a spiral thread formed around the ramrod. My firearm cleaning device has a locking extendable ramrod, which accommodates a ramrod tip designed to increase the surface area of a disposable cleaning element.
My firearm cleaning device differs from True, U.S. Pat. No. 852,748 (1907), Gardner, U.S. Pat. No. 2,616,109 (1952), Goodwin, U.S. Pat. No. 2,897,525 (1953), Ingalls, U.S. Pat. No. 3,137,957 (1964), Malesky et al., U.S. Pat. No. 4,399,627 (1983), Williams et al. U.S. Pat. No. 4,716,673 (1988), Black et al., U.S. Pat. No. 4,776,125 and Yeadon, U.S. Pat. No. 5,074,074 (1991) in that my firearm cleaning device does not have an elongated flexible shaft or cable. My firearm cleaning device is stored inside the barrel of a gun and has a built in striker-cartridge in the end of the ramrod.
My firearm cleaning device differs from Southgate, U.S. Pat. No. 1,067,383 (1913) and Geltner, U.S. Pat. No. 2,744,275 (1956) in that the locking mechanism of my device""s rod are different. Southgate""s locking mechanism which is employed for each of its several sections will fail the moment the user applies a clockwise with pushing motion. To clean the barrel of a firearm without twisting the ramrod is unrealistic. Geltner""s rod locking mechanism works on only one side of his ramrod""s sections the moment pressure is applied to the other side of any of the ramrod""s sections they won""t work.
My firearm cleaning device differs from McGavisk, U.S. Pat. No. 1,229,991 (1917) in that my device does not have a threaded rod connected to a disk, or a means for closing the muzzle end of a gun""s barrel to prevent oil from leaking out of the barrel. My device does not include or need an oil retainer for the barrel of a gun.
My firearm cleaning device differs from Olberding, U.S. Pat. No. 1,526,177 (1925) in that my device does not have coaction catches at the meeting ends to hold a rod in either the extended or contracted position or a screw stem for securing a patch.
My firearm cleaning device differs from Belding, U.S. Pat. No. 1,532,223 (1925) and Eckert, U.S. Pat. No. 3,286,293 (1966) in that my device does not have a stop collar or stop means for its ramrod. Belding or Eckert""s invention would be superfluous in conjunction with my device.
My firearm cleaning device differs from Dake, U.S. Pat. No. 1,665,257 (1928) in that Dake shows the cleaning patch detachable, whereas the patch in my device is held to rod.
My gun cleaning device differs from Jack, U.S. Pat. No. 2,405,308 (1946) in that my device does not have a metallic shell element provided with a plunger in a bore or a design having the same weight as a live cartridge. My device is designed not to be mistaken for a live round which eliminates the possibility of deadly consequences for its owner.
My firearm cleaning device differs from Hoard, U.S. Pat. No. 2,594,778 (1952) and Doyle, U.S. Pat. No. 2,985,979 (1961) because both show moisture reduction and rust prevention methods, which incorporates plugs, a far different invention than mine.
My firearm cleaning device differs from Huckabee, U.S. Pat. No. 2,763,081 (1956), Healey et al., U.S. Pat. No. 4,969,284 (1990) and Brown, U.S. Pat. No. 5,038,508 (1991) in that my firearm cleaning device is not a ridged locked-rod type of disabling or sealing device. The striker-cartridge aspect of Healey""s firearm cleaning device is a resilient material, whereas mine is spring operated.
My firearm cleaning device differs from Lewis et al., U.S. Pat. No. 3,208,302 (1965) because by device does not contain a releasable locking mechanism in its handle. My device is designed to obviate the need of a swivel handle in its ramrod.
My firearm cleaning device differs from McConnell, U.S. Pat. No. 3,564,746 (1971) in that my device does not have a plunger or a cap that can be unscrewed if the plunger needs to be replaced because of damage by repeated use. My device contains a pin that is non deforming and designed not to need replacement. McConnell""s invention does not have a rim around the breech end, is positioned by hand and is hand-held during use as a snap cap substitute.
My firearm cleaning device differs from DiProspero, U.S. Pat. No. 4,010,565 (1977) in that my firearm cleaning device does not have a tip end which is received in a cylindrical member, having a reduced size cylindrical end, for fitting into a cylindrical cup. My firearm cleaning device has a collapsible rod and stores oil and or solvent instead of patches in the handle. My firearm cleaning device is designed to be stored inside the barrel of a gun and has a built in striker cartridge in the handle of the ramrod.
My firearm cleaning device differs from Cech, U.S. Pat. No. 4,100,693 (1978) in that Cech""s claim 1 has an impact element arranged eccentrically to the cartridge jacket""s longitudinal axis, and the impact element is rotatably mounted in this opening. In addition Cech further claims a cartridge jacket wall with openings and a sleeve-like insert. The sleeve like insert contains a known chemical substance diffusing a corrosion-preventing gas, is replaceably mounted within the generally tubular side wall, and supplied to at least one additional opening serving to feed the gas to the breech area of a shotgun. Cech has no attachment for oil or cleaning solvent containers, no two piece extendable ramrod and no rod tip to accommodate a disposable cleaning element.
My firearm cleaning device differs from Jurich, III, U.S. Pat. No. 4,195,381 (1980), Zurek et al., U.S. Pat. No. 4,726,137 (1988), Stephan, U.S. Pat. No. 5,038,509 (1991), and Selleck, U.S. Pat. No. 5,075,998 (1991), in that my firearm cleaning device does not have an attached brush(s), a plurality of short, parallel shafts which are mechanically coupled to a triangularly shaped adaptor, a drive unit with drive wheels, a mechanism on a head segment for cleaning the magazine receiver of a pistol or a gun cleaning rod with a swivel handle. My firearm cleaning device is stored inside the barrel of a gun and has a built in striker cartridge in the handle of the ramrod.
My firearm cleaning device differs from DiProspero, U.S. Pat. No. 4,222,142 (1980) in that my firearm cleaning device is not a multi-functional tip for a cleaning rod. My firearm cleaning device does not claim the diverging bristle patterns claimed by DiProspero.
My firearm cleaning device differs from Carlton, U.S. Pat. No. 4,291,477 (1981) in that my firearm cleaning device does not compress a spongeous cleaning element between one end of a hollow annular compression sleeve and a retaining member. My firearm cleaning device is designed to be stored inside the barrel of a gun, has a built in striker-cartridge, and storage compartments for oil and/or cleaning solvents in the handle of the ramrod and uses a ramrod with a disposable cleaning surface.
My firearm cleaning device differs from Rupp et al., U.S. Pat. No. 4,315,780 (1982) in that my firearm cleaning device is not a liquid composition.
My firearm cleaning device differs from Beers, U.S. Pat. No. 4,328,632 (1982), Blase, U.S. Pat. No. 4,843,750 (1989), Blase, U.S. Pat. No. 4,998,368 (1991), and Shi, U.S. Pat. No. 5,341,744 (1994) in that my firearm cleaning device does not use compressed gas or compressed fluid cartridges to propel cleaning wads through the barrel of a firearm. My firearm cleaning device uses a ramrod with a disposable cleaning surface attached by hand and is repeatedly moved back and forth inside the barrel. Given any experience with cleaning firearms, it does not seem that one pass or even several passes of a gas-or fluid-propelled wad would do as effective cleaning job as my firearm cleaning device.
My firearm cleaning device differs from Izumi, U.S. Pat. No. 4,501,081 (1985) in that my firearm cleaning device is not designed to replace the firing pin of a gun. The firing pin is protected by a stroker-cartridge in my firearm cleaning device.
My firearm cleaning device differs from Bottomley, U.S. Pat. No. 4,674,218 (1987) in that my firearm cleaning device does not have a cleaning rod with a threaded inboard end cap which is sleevable upon the rod and is threadable into the inboard bore so as to be walked into tight interengagement with the handle. My firearm cleaning device is designed to be stored inside the barrel of a gun, has a built in striker-cartridge, and storage compartments for oil and/or cleaning solvents in the handle of the ramrod and uses a ramrod with a disposable cleaning surface.
My firearm cleaning device differs from Schneider, U.S. Pat. No. 4,698,932 (1987) in that his firearm cleaning device varies in diameter, depending on direction of travel inside the barrel of a gun. My firearm cleaning device could clean the barrel of a gun in both directions of rod travel.
My firearm cleaning device differs from Brown, Jr. et al., U.S. Pat. No. 4,803,792 (1989), in that my firearm cleaning device is not guidably positioned in a carrier sleeve which, at its front end, cooperates with a breech mounting plug to loosely limit its sidewise movement and which at its back end cooperates with a close-clearance-defining bore of a plug-like guide sleeve.
My firearm cleaning device differs from Rivers, U.S. Pat. No. 4,866,871 (1989) in that my firearm cleaning device does not have a rod mounted in a sleeve, a gun cleaning element attached to the rod or a mounting means attached to the sleeve for slidably guiding the rod along a sleeve.
My firearm cleaning device differs from Stipp, U.S. Pat. No. 4,873,778 (1989) in that I do not claim a foam-type disposable cleaning element.
My firearm cleaning device differs from French, U.S. Pat. No. 4,890,406 (1990) in that my firearm cleaning device is not for a muzzle loading gun and does not claim a ramrod of two different concentric materials.
My firearm cleaning device differs from Hsu, U.S. Pat. No. 4,901,465 (1990) in that my firearm cleaning device does not have a plurality of section which are detachably interconnected with one another and which can be stored in its tubular casing.
My firearm cleaning device differs from Frigon et al., U.S. Pat. No. 5,022,176 (1991) in that my firearm cleaning device is not an external holding device for storing a ramrod on the barrel of a shotgun or other firearm. My firearm cleaning device is designed to be stored inside the barrel of a gun.
My firearm cleaning device differs from Mekler, U.S. Pat. No. 5,171,925 (1992), in that my firearm cleaning device uses a ramrod with a disposable cleaning surface attached by hand and is not a pull-through device for cleaning gun barrels as Mekler shows.
My firearm cleaning device differs from Tellechea, U.S. Pat. No. 5,204,483 (1993) in that my firearm cleaning device is not a shaft having cylindrical members and bushings to prevent the shaft from scraping the internal surface of the barrel during cleaning. My firearm cleaning device does not require bushings to prevent its shaft from scraping the barrel of a gun because my firearm cleaning device""s shaft is made from a material that will not harm metal. My firearm cleaning device is stored inside the barrel of a gun.
My firearm cleaning device differs from Peterson, U.S. Pat. No. 5,233,124 (1993) in that my firearm cleaning device does not provide a cartridge case simulator for which a bullet is to be positioned for subsequent identification of a desired location relative to an intended corresponding cartridge case or a gauge shaft for reciprocal movement along the axial aligned passage and duct.
My firearm cleaning device differs from Stengel, U.S. Pat. No. 5,357,705 (1994) in that my firearm cleaning device does not provide a wire brush for cleaning a firearm or a moveable handle so either end of the device can be used for cleaning. My firearm cleaning device is designed to ride within a gun""s barrel, and provides storage for oil and/or solvent. Stengel does not provide protection of a firearm""s firing pin from damage during cleaning; mine is a striker cartridge.
My firearm cleaning device differs from Darrow, U.S. Pat. No. 5,435,090 (1995) in that Darrow shows an interrupted rim and a solid energy absorbing core. Darrow has no attachment for oil or cleaning solvent containers or a two piece extendable ramrod. Darrow""s firearm cleaning device contains a top part tapped and threaded for a brush which is not part of my firearm cleaning device.
The Firearm Cleaning Device is designed to travel inside that barrels of a firearm. The system contains either one or two units. Each unit contains a cartridge-like end. The cartridge-like end accommodates a pin which is backed by a spring. The cartridge end (or stroker cartridge) is designed to absorb the motion of a firearm""s hammer by giving the firing pin something to hit which has the similar amount of resistance as an actual live cartridge""s primer. The benefits of this are:
1. the prevention of the gradual shearing of the firing pin from its connecting hammer.
2. the prevention of damage by deformation to the gun""s hammer(s).
3. the prevention of possible deterioration to the (hammer and firing pin""s) spring by allowing a safe and innocuous release of the spring""s tension.
Further objects and advantages of this invention are:
(a) it provides a ramrod tip which will accommodate a disposable cleaning surface such as a paper towel;
(b) it provides more surface area for the disposable cleaning surface;
(c) it provides ease of use;
(d) it provides a built-in safety mechanism for shotguns;
(e) it provides a built-in striker cartridge;
(f) it provides built-in reservoirs for cleaning fluid; and
(g) it provides convenience for transportation.